Four Republicans leaders in Congress say the U.S. Justice Department brokered an "unprecedented" deal with St. Paul last year, agreeing not to join two housing-related lawsuits against the city as long as St. Paul pulled out of a U.S. Supreme Court case.

The city was lobbied by former Vice President Walter Mondale, the NAACP, the AFL-CIO and dozens of others over the court case, worried that a legal victory would gut protections for minorities in the Fair Housing Act and other civil rights legislation.

The congressional Republicans now question the Justice Department's role in the city's decision.

In a letter Monday, Sept. 24, to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, the congressional leaders say Assistant U.S. Attorney General Tom Perez, over the objections of staff lawyers, "enticed the city to drop its lawsuit that Mr. Perez did not want decided by the Supreme Court."

"One of the features of this quid pro quo, distinguishing it from a standard settlement or plea deal, was that it obstructed rather than furthered the ends of justice," they wrote.

They're asking four attorneys from Holder's office to submit to transcribed interviews by Friday, Sept. 28.

The Justice Department has yet to issue a written response to the request.

The attorneys include former U.S. attorney for Minnesota, B. Todd Jones, who is now the acting director of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The others are Perez, Tony West and Chad Blumenfield.

Advertisement

Many legal observers said St. Paul likely would have won the Supreme Court case had the city not dropped its appeal of lawsuits filed in 2004 and 2005.

In Magner vs. Gallagher, a dozen St. Paul landlords argued that the city's extensive efforts to inspect and condemn their properties -- a "code to the max" philosophy -- decreased the amount of affordable housing available to minorities, a violation of, or "disparate impact" under, the federal Fair Housing Act. The city argued otherwise, and many civil rights advocates worried that the city would win the argument, inadvertently creating huge exceptions to the act and other civil rights legislation.

The congressional committees leaders allege the Justice Department gave the city an offer it could barely refuse.

In an exchange for St. Paul withdrawing Magner vs. Gallagher from the nation's highest court, the Justice Department allegedly agreed not to join two unrelated housing-related lawsuits that were then pending against the city -- federal lawsuits that could have cost the city upwards of $180 million in damages and bankrupted city coffers if they'd been decided in favor of the plaintiffs.

The Sept. 24 letter is signed by U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, chairman of the judiciary panel; U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government; U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley, ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary; and U.S. Rep. Patrick McHenry, who chairs a subcommittee of a Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

The congressional leaders have asked for a formal, sit-down interview with Holder's office on Friday, as well as additional documentation.

City officials are not denying their conversations with the Department of Justice last year involved all three legal cases. But they maintain they were mostly concerned about preserving 40 years of civil rights legislation that could have been upended by Magner vs. Gallagher.

A written statement issued Tuesday, Sept. 25, by City Attorney Sara Grewing indicates "a secondary reason" for agreeing to pull Magner vs. Gallagher from the Supreme Court calendar was "to avoid conflict with the federal government in two pending lawsuits against the city ... that the city considered to be without merit."

In a statement Tuesday, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department defended the agency's conversations with the city: "The department has broad discretion under the False Claims Act to achieve global resolutions that consider policy and other pending litigation factors."

The statement, forwarded by Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler, also indicated: "Perez consulted with ethics and professional responsibility officials within the (department's) Civil Rights Division regarding discussions he could have with the city regarding the civil cases and was advised there were no concerns."

Schmaler noted that the Justice Department does not intervene in the majority of civil cases in which private parties expect to receive compensation for assisting prosecutors under the False Claims Act.

City officials are seeking to minimize the alleged exchange of favors, and they said they are confident they would have won all three housing lawsuits. Magner v. Gallagher has been remanded back to federal court in Minneapolis. A settlement conference is scheduled for Oct. 26.

One of the two cases that the Justice Department agreed not to join later was dismissed in federal court, largely because it was filed by a private party and not by an impacted government agency. It is now being appealed by the plaintiff, Fred Newell, who has sued St. Paul at least five times. The other federal case, filed by Michael Blodgett against the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, still is pending.

Newell alleged the city received millions of dollars in federal housing funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, but failed to abide by a requirement: The city was expected to hire moderate-income and low-income workers of all races for HUD-backed construction projects.

Newell filed two complaints with HUD in 2008, and a department investigation uncovered that the required annual reports (HUD Form 60002) had not been filed for several years. From 2006 to 2008, the city received $31 million in federal CDBG and HOME funds.

Current city officials have said while record keeping and forms were not completed properly under the administration of former St. Paul Mayor Randy Kelly, they believe they hit hiring goals using compliance officers from the Department of Planning and Economic Development. After Mayor Chris Coleman took office, he established the city's Department of Human Rights and Equal Opportunity, which now monitors city contracts and makes sure hiring goals are being achieved.

The U.S. Attorney General's Office had more than one reason to want St. Paul to pull Magner v. Gallagher from the U.S. Supreme Court calendar. Holder and his staff expressed concern at the time that if the Supreme Court justices gutted the Fair Housing Act, similar protections would fall by the wayside, including protections necessary to win major legal fights with several banks under investigation for their lending practices during the housing boom.